Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

crookedvulture writes "Intel's Next Unit of Computing has finally made its way into the hands of reviewers. The final revision is a little different from the demo unit that made the rounds earlier this year, but the concept remains the same. Intel has crammed what are essentially ultrabook internals into a tiny box measuring 4" x 4" x 2". A mobile Core i3 CPU provides the horsepower, and there's a decent array of I/O ports: USB, HDMI, and Thunderbolt. Users can add their own memory, storage, and wireless card to the system, which will be sold without an OS for around $300. Those extras raise the total price, bringing the NUC closer to Mac Mini territory. The Apple system has a bigger footprint, but it also boasts a faster processer and the ability to accommodate notebook hard drives with higher storage capacities than the mSATA SSDs that are compatible with the NUC. If Intel can convince system builders to adopt the NUC, the future of the PC could be a lot smaller."

I've been wanting a PC-based system that expands like LEGO for over a decade now. However, I don't insist it be smaller. In fact, I want it bigger. 4" x 4" x 2" is too small. 4" x 4" x 4" (or 100mm x 100mm x 100mm for the normal parts of the world) is much better. That provides enough room for a CPU, a GPU, a standard notebook hard drive, and a standard 80mm fan. With a certain amount of squeezing, a CPU, a GPU, and a second GPU, each on its own board, stacked one on top of the other, and still with room for a hard drive. If the product takes off, offer additional configurations, such as dual CPU + GPU, or quad CPU no GPU, or single CPU + 4 hard drives, or single CPU + single GPU + 2 hard drives. Add a whole boatload of off-board signals on the chipset on the CPU card and run those signals to pinless contacts in each of the 6 faces of the cube. Round springloaded contacts might do. Add extra contacts for a DC power bus. I was told by an Intel test engineer, years ago, that PCI-e in its external connector incarnation could probably work well under these conditions. Hold cubes to each other with magnets at the corners, arranging the polarities of the magnets to force the correct lineup of the boards and exhaust fans into wind tunnels.

Software would be tricky. Ideally you would want an arbitrary collection of cubes to be able to self-organize into a ccNUMA system. In practice, you may want dual mode software. Default coupling might be as a compute cluster, and only manually enable ccNUMA when you know a particular collection of cubes is going to be stable long term.

Give the standard configuration cube (whichever one that might be) 1 DC power connector, 1 gigabit ethernet port, 1 Displayport, and 4 USB ports. Vary the ports as needed for the other configurations. Add some external LEDs for indicators of power and compute coupling mode and voila, an arbitrarily expandable compute platform that scales from a minimum of one cube to some silly maximum that is probably only hit when thermal management gets out of hand.

Someday I'll have money enough to have some boards designed... Someday.

Oh, and desktop versions of the CPU(s) and GPU(s). If possible. Get creative... This particular wish was a lot more feasible when I first conceived of the idea a decade ago. These days the infrastructure surrounding desktop CPUs and GPUs has gotten too extensive to fit anymore. The collection of capacitors alone has gotten silly. More's the pity.

But I wasn't talking about literal LEGO style connections, where pieces of plastic physically interlock. While LEGO's connect/disconnect cycle count is actually very very high, it requires ABS plastic and extremely tight manufacturing tolerances, and I suspect it's only achievable at the scale LEGO is made. The compute blocks I'm talking about are probably too large for that style of connection. Hence my mention of magnets.

As for vendor lock-in, people buy NanoITX parts, even though there was

Yes because MAC invented small PC's its not like the microATX was introduced in December 1997. The original release was January 22, 2005 for the MAC Mini. Lets ignore the rich history of SFF PC's from the likes of Shuttle [I have owned many] http://www.shuttle.com/ [shuttle.com] or even new popular brands like Revo from Acer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acer_Aspire_Revo [wikipedia.org] Which oddly I also own.

You realise that ATX motherboards have a footprint nearly 4 times that of the MacMini (and that's without a case). They also mandate space above the CPU for a cooler that's twice as tall as a MacMini... So your example doesn't really seem apropriate.

You may have meant mITX, which was developed in 2001... But *still* wasn't as small as the MacMini.

Yeah, it's not like there are already cheaper and more powerful options for a mini-pc than a Mac Mini; I'm sure Intel was just so threatened by Apple's second least popular product.Face it, this Intel initiative is about semi-ubiquitous computing with a bit of a general twist. Not a response to the Mac that's seen the least innovation/interest.

and I might consider it. Looks like a reasonable HTPC, but without the video horse power to run ZSNES, other emulators, or even Linux native 3D games (not even necessarily the advanced ones) I won't consider it.

Ignoring the fact that its clearly not a gaming rig, the intel HD Graphics 4000, to put it in some kind of perspective I am currelty using Intel HD Graphics 3000 which allows me to play games like trine http://trine-thegame.com/site/ [trine-thegame.com] and Rochard http://www.rochardthegame.com/en/ [rochardthegame.com] both great Linux games

As for ZSNES please [snaps fingers],that was designed to run SNES full speed on a 486 with a SIS 630 chipset. Now BSNES now that is a different beast!!

Erm, the newest Intel graphics can run Crysis at semi-respectable settings. Considering I ran ZSNES just fine on a Rage 3D, I have no idea where you got the idea Intel graphics can't run a simple SNES emulator.

Remember, Intel's newest graphics ("Intel HD") are a ground-up new design, not at all related to the old ("Intel GMA") integrated graphics.

ZSNES is a strange beast. Running it at low res and no filters is generally pretty easy on just about anything, but sound may suffer. Increase the resolution (say for a non-scaling LCD) or add any filters and there's severe performance hits, especially where sound is concerned. I've done much better with decade old equipment with good hardware of the era than I have with mostly software driven modern equipment.

I would rather run a Riva TNT2 and a Soundblaster 16 with the correct drivers and any OS with ZSN

Not only these devices are significantly weaker, but Google is selling them for the manufacturing cost. Google wants you to use them so they can make money through advertisement and selling content. Intel is trying to provide a stand alone computer platform. They are selling hardware and if they don't make a profit on hardware sales, they won't make profit anywhere. The problem of these devices is not the price, but the lack of basic audio output ports and ethernet. Even for a device that I guess is suppose

A quick look at the Mac mini shows them at $600 [500 i5] or $800 [1TB i7] so about half the price sans memory and hard drive. Ignoring the OS they are significantly better value, and you get to avoid all the Apple lock-in crap that is forced on you.

Though I have to admit both these options seem incredibly expensive vs the myrid of ARM choices out there with a variety of funky/functional enclosures, and use next to no power, running everything from XBMC; Full Desktop Linux; Android[TV], and more than anythin

I still can't take any writing seriously which begins by preaching the end of the PC. First, every computing-capable non-mainframe computer is a PC. Second, there will always be a need for PCs with "normal" computational capacity (meaning more than a mobile i3 cpu), of course in smaller numbers, but still. Remember, not everyone is only a content consumer living on tablets and small form factor AIO computers.

That said, I like these small devices, they have their use and place, in my home too. And I like that there are nice alternatives to Apple.

Second, there will always be a need for PCs with "normal" computational capacity

I am not convinced that we will in a post-pc world...an always connected world maybe. but I disagree with you justification on defending a PC as a "personal computer", because tablets/Smartphones albeit incredibly powerful computing devices, and not tradition [Desktop] PCs. Ironically you recognise this by saying smartphones and tablets cannot do [well do badly], by accessing that traditional PC's [what you call "normal"(sic) PC's].

I'm kind of tired of people trying to defend traditional PC's. If you create

Remember, not everyone is only a content consumer living on tablets and small form factor AIO computers.

The thinking is that the majority of home users are using their computers to view existing works rather than for medium- to heavy-duty creation of new works. As applications for light-duty creation become available for locked-down computers, more and more heads of household will choose not to own a computer that's not locked down. People who fear a "post-PC" ecosystem fear a loss of economies of scale that will cause the price of a computer that's not locked down to increase beyond a typical hobbyist's budg

Please take a quick look at the soon to be available board being proffered at Parallella.org. or you can enjoy their videos [kickstarter.com]. Now you can get the 16+2 core super computer for $99, or the 64+2 core super computer for $199. The board comes with plenty of I/O options and two GPIO bus board expanders. By the way the board is expected to run under 5 watts in use.

It comes with linux installed. I could easily imagine a computer dramatically smaller than an Mac Mini running at lower power with the selection of peripherals that nobody expects. This little machine is going to redefine computers and I hope Intel can hear those tiny feet running up behind them at this very moment.

When I saw it called the "unit" of computing I thought maybe it was modular so I could snap together a few "units" of them to make it faster, bigger, etc.

Shoot, make it NOT expandable at ALL and simply modular, so more ram, more hd, more proc, etc, just click it together. Have variations, different colors mean more ram or more hard drive. Pair a unit with more ram with a unit with more processor.

Otherwise, whats the point? They've made a nettop with an i3 rather than a atom? Ok...

I LOVE the idea of this thing. I LOVE the size. I LOVE most of the choices and tradeoffs. i love the external power brick - and big fat Bronx cheer to Apple for abandoning that and bringing 110VAC right into their latest minis. Really stupid, Apple.But so sorry...1) No ethernet = HUGE FAIL2) No USB3 and not enough USB's = HUGE FAILThese are absolute showstoppers. Fix these and this thing is the answer to my prayers. I'll accept up to 1" more width and depth to get them.

People here seem to have forgotten what a proof of concept design is. This board is intended to inspire Intel's partners to take the basic building block, extend it in some certain way and address their cluent's needs. Like the Atom MBs. After Intel produced their first few Atom MBs all kinds if systems emerged - SuperMicro made some server MBs, others added better graphics support, etc.

I look at the NUC and I can easily imagine a system with similar specs, 8 gigs of RAM, 64 Gigs of local storage, a gigabit

$300-$320? The original/. article was quoting prices of around $100, but it looks like it was more like wishful speculation. Where is the Ethernet port, memory or storage? Hell they don't even have an eSATA port which you can find on just about every motherboard these days. I can buy the parts to make a mini PC using an ITX board for less than $300 and that includes storage, memory and gigabit Ethernet plus eSATA. The CPU would be an AMD A series which has graphics that will wipe the floor with the i3's HD

The review says it has a VESA mounting bracket. With that, you can probably hook it up to the back side of your monitor and make yourself a simple all-in-one pc. Of course, it will be less neat than the prepackaged options, but it will probably also be much cheaper and allow you to upgrade monitor and pc separately.

Until I saw the price tag. Comparing those specs to a tablet or laptop, this is a pricey machine without an OS or monitor. I suppose I can see a market for this as a compact personal server, but still, no ethernet? I'm just not clear what market they are targeting with this.

You have the choice between 2 gigabit ports or a thunderbolt port w/o ethernet. But not both. Intel's low end offerings seem to be deliberately crippled so as to not complete with their higher end stuff. You add in the memory and drive on one of these and you're about $100 short of a mac mini which has gigabit ethernet and thunderbolt together plus usb 3.0 and no fscking power brick.

Somewhere, in a distant law office, a legal team collectively stands up and performs stretching and other warm-up exercises. And to top it all off, they crack their knuckles for yet another big showdown.

Not a troll, just a comment that is more a history reference, in a world where its been impossible to buy a PC without an OS for years http://www.zdnet.com/top-five-pc-manufacturers-fail-naked-pc-test-3039286228/ [zdnet.com] this is an article describing how difficult it was in 2007. The truth is Microsoft created the [propaganda] term "Naked PC" for "its dramatic value and as a means for creating the impression that it is evil to sell computers without operating systems because they might be used for so-called software piracy" http://www.linfo.org/naked_pc.html [linfo.org]

"Conspiracy theory"? Lol... a "conspiracy theory" for which Microsoft was taken to court and found guilty due to the actual evidence... I suppose the slashdot crowd are getting too young to remember these things, but is it too much to expect to even know the basics of one of the most famous historical antitrust cases in the history of the tech industry?

What didn't we like about the Mac Mini? I haven't used an expansion port on a PC about 15 years other than a 3Dvideo card. And if I want a gaming rig I'll get something big and airy with lots of fans. If I need a grunt box, I'll run up a VM on my servers at work. For everything else the Mac Mini is perfect. I never understood why PCs we're so big these days. 90% of them are simple Web/Email/Word processors, the Mac Mini and new this Intel thing are all most of us need.

I haven't used an expansion port on a PC about 15 years other than a 3Dvideo card.

We could translate your argument as "I splash money around like its going out of style so things like expansion ports are stupid"

Many of us use those expansion slots about halfway through the life of the machine in order to upgrade them inexpensively (like adding SATA 3.0 to a machine purchased when SATA 1.0 was still new), repair them when a specific component goes tits up (The NIC died? Thats a $15 card for full-on b/g/n wireless), or to add specific functionality that only comes standard on much more expensive machines..

Many of us use those expansion slots about halfway through the life of the machine in order to upgrade them inexpensively (like adding SATA 3.0 to a machine purchased when SATA 1.0 was still new)

Yeah, because not having SATA 3 makes a machine ununsable...

repair them when a specific component goes tits up (The NIC died? Thats a $15 card for full-on b/g/n wireless)

Yeah, because if a NIC dies then it doesn't matter that it's probably part of the motherboard chipset and all of a sudden you have an expensive repair bill. Not to mention that wireless cards *are* plug-in PCIe cards on these mini form factor PCs...

or to add specific functionality that only comes standard on much more expensive machines..

I think you might be havign problems understandnig/empathising with what a 'normal' person is going to want out of a PC. Not only that, but even us geeks get bored of the PC treadmill after a while. The

I see you saying that you will buy a whole new computer if you need SATA 3.

I see you also saying that you blow reams of money on Apple hardware.

You have just proved that you too will splash money around like its going out of style, so for you things like expansion ports are stupid. In my world, its not expansion ports that are stupid.. its needlessly wasting money like a complete retard thats stupid.

Don't let the fact that the next unit of computing is marketed as having an i3 while the chip in his ITX build is marketed as a celeron fool you, look at the actual specs of the processor. A little extra cache and a slight core revision are not going to make up for a nearly 50% clockspeed difference.

Who is the "we" my main problem with the Mac Mini is the Price, and this is half that, and has more flexibility. Not really sure what this has to do with Microsoft being stupid, this looks like bog standard hardware.

Ever seen one of those Acer Aspire Revo "nettops"? Mine is the original - 1.6 GHz Atom processor (64-bit), nVidia Ion onboard graphics, 7 USB ports, ethernet, HDMI and VGA. Current models use an AMD processor and graphics for $329 or Intel I3 and Intel graphics for $499. (The $329 model has no optical drive, the $499 model has an 8x DVD+/-RW drive.)

The case on all of the above is about 1.5"x8"x8".

Actually, given that I'm not certain what the NUC is supposed to be offering. Slightly smaller form factor, that's about it...

Don't forget that it doesn't come with an OS. Unless you run Linux or some sort of BSD you can add the retail cost of Windows on to that price too. My mini also has the power supply internal unlike the older model with the brick.

"Don't forget that it doesn't come with an OS. Unless you run Linux or some sort of BSD you can add the retail cost of Windows on to that price too. My mini also has the power supply internal unlike the older model with the brick."

Ugh. Why would you take a perfectly good raw hardware box like this and add Windows to it?

Not meaning to troll, honest. But this thing is barely capable of running Windows at all. You could put Linux on it and have a pretty snappy machine.

This box doesn't look exactly cheap either. It's unclear to me if the anticipated $300-320 retail price includes the memory, storage or wifi module. They say they added that stuff in their boxto make the price $450. When you consider that netbooks cost less but included wifi, memory, harddisk, battery, screen, keyboard / trackpad it makes you wonder why this thing costs so much. The CPU is better than an Atom processor but not *that* much better.

Better CPU, better GPU, has multiple PCIE slots (with at least one 2.0 x16) and you can upgrade it. This Intel brick for $300..$320 (I read the article) has the CPU soldered on, and no PCIE slots so no upgrades of any kind ever, and the price quote doesn't include memory (which is why I didn't include any.)

I'm sure that you could also put together a better performing Intel box (using a Celeron G5xx series for instance) for about 60% of the money as well.

Looks to me like Intel over-produced some CPU's and/or chipsets and are looking to find a market for them.

Try this one [amazon.com], at just over half the price of this Intel brick.

You could try googling for "amd fusion nettop", I hear all the cool kids are using google these days. That's how I found the above one, a review in the first page of results. You fail at the internets.

Looks to me like Intel over-produced some CPU's and/or chipsets and are looking to find a market for them.

Seriously? You think their production processes are so out of sync with demand that they had to try and invent/promote an entirely new platform to reduce the backlog?

I suspect Intel has buyers for most chips before they are ever produced. What I see is an attempt to build out on the original idea behind the various Atom motherboards they have been producing for years - small, good-enough systems that us

This is a tech demo. Intel doesn't make full out of the box PCs (and might not, ever). This is to inspire hardware makers (cough, HP) who are otherwise totally screwed, to come up with something "new" in the PC realm. This is the form factor that will see growth in the future, the old days of a big box with a bunch of cards you could swap in and out are gone (unless you are a hard-core hobbyist willing to pay a price premium). The desktop systems made today by Dell, HP, etc are way too big for what they